# Beyond Detection: Exploring Evidence-based Multi-Agent Debate for Misinformation Intervention and Persuasion

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.07267 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.07267/

## Key facts

- Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Social simulation and multi-agent debate, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 12 of its 29 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 10 Nov 2025.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [Social simulation and multi-agent debate](https://mlsanity.com/agents/social-simulation-and-multi-agent-debate/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 12 of 12)

- [RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.11692/) (2019)
- [Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17651/) (2023)
- [Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14325/) (2023)
- [Encouraging Divergent Thinking in Large Language Models through Multi-Agent Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.19118/) (2023)
- [Automatic Detection of Fake News](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1708.07104/) (2017)
- [On the Conversational Persuasiveness of Large Language Models: A Randomized Controlled Trial](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.14380/) (2024)
- [Improving Multi-Agent Debate with Sparse Communication Topology](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.11776/) (2024)
- [Retrieval-Augmented Generation with Conflicting Evidence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.13079/) (2025)
- [The Truth Becomes Clearer Through Debate! Multi-Agent Systems with Large Language Models Unmask Fake News](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.08532/) (2025)
- [TableEval: A Real-World Benchmark for Complex, Multilingual, and Multi-Structured Table Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.03949/) (2025)
- [Exploring Text-transformers in AAAI 2021 Shared Task: COVID-19 Fake News Detection in English](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2101.02359/) (2021)
- [Exploring Lightweight Interventions at Posting Time to Reduce the Sharing of Misinformation on Social Media](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2101.11824/) (2021)

## Built on by (most cited first, 4 of 4)

- [Thinking Like a Clinician: A Cognitive AI Agent for Clinical Diagnosis via Panoramic Profiling and Adversarial Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.23605/) (2026)
- [ExpWeaver: LLM Agents Learn from Experience via Latent RAG](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.01041/) (2026)
- [Large Language Models in Misinformation Ecosystems: Misuse, Defense, and Vulnerability](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.10402/) (2026)
- [Let the Bullets Fly: Multimodal Fake News Detection with Temporal-Aligned Generative Danmaku](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.22832/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Multi-agent debate (MAD) frameworks have emerged as promising approaches for misinformation detection by simulating adversarial reasoning. While prior work has focused on detection accuracy, it overlooks the importance of helping users understand the reasoning behind factual judgments and develop future resilience. The debate transcripts generated during MAD offer a rich but underutilized resource for transparent reasoning. In this study, we introduce ED2D, an evidence-based MAD framework that extends previous approach by incorporating factual evidence retrieval. More importantly, ED2D is designed not only as a detection framework but also as a persuasive multi-agent system aimed at correcting user beliefs and discouraging misinformation sharing. We compare the persuasive effects of ED2D-generated debunking transcripts with those authored by human experts. Results demonstrate that ED2D outperforms existing baselines across three misinformation detection benchmarks. When ED2D generates correct predictions, its debunking transcripts exhibit persuasive effects comparable to those of human experts; However, when ED2D misclassifies, its accompanying explanations may inadvertently reinforce users'misconceptions, even when presented alongside accurate human explanations. Our findings highlight both the promise and the potential risks of deploying MAD systems for misinformation intervention. We further develop a public community website to help users explore ED2D, fostering transparency, critical thinking, and collaborative fact-checking.